Would You Play Conquest Deploy?

[Jippd]

Won't work with people starting randomly with 1 spot. If we happen to start right next to each other in a 1 v 1 game first turn would get the win every time.

Also what would the XML implications be with this? I feel like ALL of the maps would have to have the XML re written/edited for this new starting position options wouldn't it?

[BoganGod]

I think that the real problem with too many options is that they can overwhelm new people when they see the overcrowded "start a game" screen. I find hard to believe that too many options can alienate experienced players. Just don't worry about the ones you dislike and that's all.

There is also the argument that the player base gets too fragmented with too many options, but I disagree too. When I don't find a game with my favourite options and don't want to wait, I join games that are close. For example, if I wanted to play no spoils I can join flat rate, because they are close enough.

THis I can agree with but there are other solutions for those who may be overwhelmed when new here. As to this idea I have yet to see a legitimate argument why it is not good for the site.

Correct fazeem, there are already ways/solutions to gradually introduce new players to settings and maps. Limiting and/or locking maps and settings initially is a proven tool. Both increases interest and challenge(must unlock, what are the locked objects/settings like?). Also decreases risk of fatigue, burnout or information overload.



I'm against to many settings from a time perspective. I don't want to take 15minutes just to set up a game. If there were options to disable/hide options and personalise the START A GAME screen that would be fucking awesome.

[Fazeem]

I think that the real problem with too many options is that they can overwhelm new people when they see the overcrowded "start a game" screen. I find hard to believe that too many options can alienate experienced players. Just don't worry about the ones you dislike and that's all.

There is also the argument that the player base gets too fragmented with too many options, but I disagree too. When I don't find a game with my favourite options and don't want to wait, I join games that are close. For example, if I wanted to play no spoils I can join flat rate, because they are close enough.

THis I can agree with but there are other solutions for those who may be overwhelmed when new here. As to this idea I have yet to see a legitimate argument why it is not good for the site.

Correct fazeem, there are already ways/solutions to gradually introduce new players to settings and maps. Limiting and/or locking maps and settings initially is a proven tool. Both increases interest and challenge(must unlock, what are the locked objects/settings like?). Also decreases risk of fatigue, burnout or information overload.



I'm against to many settings from a time perspective. I don't want to take 15minutes just to set up a game. If there were options to disable/hide options and personalise the START A GAME screen that would be fucking awesome.

this I see being slowly implemented...

[loutil]

Won't work with people starting randomly with 1 spot. If we happen to start right next to each other in a 1 v 1 game first turn would get the win every time.

This would be my concern. It would suck to lose a game before you even took a turn. Having said that...I have played a few games here where the drop pre determined the winner.